From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 76E07C433DB for ; Mon, 1 Mar 2021 11:44:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4035F64E31 for ; Mon, 1 Mar 2021 11:44:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S233576AbhCALn4 (ORCPT ); Mon, 1 Mar 2021 06:43:56 -0500 Received: from mga06.intel.com ([134.134.136.31]:24176 "EHLO mga06.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S233784AbhCALny (ORCPT ); Mon, 1 Mar 2021 06:43:54 -0500 IronPort-SDR: BxYUPim6W4doxxudPHHFJghO/bncfnLEH3jRIlmTjd5aXILMbmFiSng/yisu+2o4j4ykt79iRU skG1PJYcd0aA== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6000,8403,9909"; a="247845143" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.81,215,1610438400"; d="scan'208";a="247845143" Received: from orsmga007.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.58]) by orsmga104.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 01 Mar 2021 03:43:12 -0800 IronPort-SDR: wIUzBrdcqZC5vNIMvqSOcoDLuV5Xjyea8BQMKuyuexXycz5IvGu77L9NlgDlL2cqvSf0FE0b4z PAljjsFc2rrQ== X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.81,215,1610438400"; d="scan'208";a="405653458" Received: from sanand-mobl.amr.corp.intel.com ([10.251.13.183]) by orsmga007-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 01 Mar 2021 03:43:09 -0800 Message-ID: <0adc41774945bf9d6e6a72a93b83c80aa8c59544.camel@intel.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/25] x86/cpufeatures: Add SGX1 and SGX2 sub-features From: Kai Huang To: Borislav Petkov Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org, linux-sgx@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, seanjc@google.com, jarkko@kernel.org, luto@kernel.org, dave.hansen@intel.com, rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com, haitao.huang@intel.com, pbonzini@redhat.com, tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@redhat.com, hpa@zytor.com Date: Tue, 02 Mar 2021 00:43:06 +1300 In-Reply-To: <20210301113257.GD6699@zn.tnic> References: <20210301100037.GA6699@zn.tnic> <3fce1dd2abd42597bde7ae9496bde7b9596b2797.camel@intel.com> <20210301103043.GB6699@zn.tnic> <7603ef673997b6674f785d333a4f263c749d2cf3.camel@intel.com> <20210301105346.GC6699@zn.tnic> <20210301113257.GD6699@zn.tnic> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" User-Agent: Evolution 3.38.4 (3.38.4-1.fc33) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: kvm@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 2021-03-01 at 12:32 +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Tue, Mar 02, 2021 at 12:28:27AM +1300, Kai Huang wrote: > > I think some script can utilize /proc/cpuinfo. For instance, admin can have > > automation tool/script to deploy enclave (with sgx2) apps, and that script can check > > whether platform supports sgx2 or not, before it can deploy those enclave apps. Or > > enclave author may just want to check /proc/cpuinfo to know whether the machine can > > be used for testing sgx2 enclave or not. > > This doesn't sound like a concrete use of this. So you can hide it > initially with "" until you guys have a use case. Exposing it later is > always easy vs exposing it now and then not being able to change it > anymore. > Hi Haitao, Jarkko, Do you have more concrete use case of needing "sgx2" in /proc/cpuinfo? Hi Boris, To confirm, if we suppress both "sgx1" and "sgx2" in /proc/cpuinfo, we don't need to add "why to suppress" in commit message, right?